Armed Forces Chaplains (Licensing) Measure

Baroness Butler-Sloss Excerpts

Tuesday 9th December 2025 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Harris of Richmond (LD) [V]]

My Lords, I thank the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Winchester for bringing these two Measures to your Lordships’ House. I will address the Abuse Redress Measure first.

This is yet another Measure that we have recently discussed in the Ecclesiastical Committee—one of a number of crucial pieces of legislation which the Church is putting in place to address the unacceptable and disgraceful past experiences of survivors of abuse perpetrated by Church personnel, both priests and lay members. Under the exceptional guidance of our chair, the noble and learned Baroness, Lady Butler-Sloss, we are slowly making our way towards some resolution of painful incidents, some of which happened many years ago.

The Abuse Redress Measure seeks to bring in a redress scheme, as we have heard from the right reverend Prelate, which enables the Archbishops’ Council to delegate decision-making on cases to a third party. This scheme, long in the production, has the approval of almost all parts which make up the General Synod. However, when we looked closely at the scheme, members asked many searching questions of the Church representatives, not least around transparency and the need to have independent observance of the scheme to ensure equity and speed of redress.

The Church of England’s dire handling of abuse issues has prompted urgent calls for it to quickly put into place a scheme which recognised its failings and offered compensation to the victims affected by the appalling behaviour of some clergy. Their pain and suffering needed to be addressed urgently. As we have heard, the scheme is not intended to mirror a court of law, but responds whenever there is a failure within the Church if it has been the cause of abuse. Applicants will be offered independent legal and financial advice in order to bring their case forward, and a review process whereby the General Synod will hold the Archbishops’ Council accountable for the operation of the scheme is proposed. Many victims and survivors have waited years for such legislation and, although it is not perfect, it begins to address some of their concerns. As we have heard, we deemed it expedient.

The second Measure before us, and I will be brief, is the Armed Forces Chaplains (Licensing) Measure, which simply seeks to address a rather odd problem which has been occurring for years, and which this Measure had to be brought forward to correct. Chaplains play a very important role in the armed services. This tidying-up and simplifying legislation avoids the need for a chaplain to get the permission of another bishop, in whose diocese he might be present, to officiate in his or her role as army chaplain. The Measure provides a statutory basis for the current custom and practice, whereby the Archbishop of Canterbury licenses chaplains to His Majesty’s forces, giving them ecclesiastical authority to exercise the Church’s ministry in that role, without them having to also seek permission from the diocesan bishop to exercise their ministry as an Armed Forces chaplain in the area in which they find themselves. This is a wholly sensible and necessary Measure to which all members of the General Synod agreed. We certainly deemed it expedient when we addressed it in committee, and I commend it to the House.

[Baroness Butler-Sloss (CB)]

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady Harris, because she said almost everything that I was going to say, which is always a great help. I am the chair of the Ecclesiastical Committee, which is a Joint Committee of both Houses, with 30 members. We found it extremely easy. We were created under the assembly Act 1919 and it is our job, as noted by the noble Baroness, Lady Harris, to find a Measure from General Synod either expedient or not expedient—that is our sole duty. The chaplains Measure was extremely easy. It is a very sensible clearing up of an anomaly which had gone on for many years. The committee spent very little time on it.

We spent a great deal of time over the redress Measure. We had extremely helpful information from the Church and a considerable group led by the right reverend Prelate. We found the information provided to us useful. As the noble Baroness, Lady Harris, said, we asked a lot of very searching questions. We received a lot of information from two or three people who disapproved of the Measure, but rather more information from those who approved of it. We had a number of victim survivors attend our open meeting, and a considerable number more, I understand, listening online.

We had no trouble at all, having heard the extremely helpful information from the Church, in eventually finding that this was a very good, sensible step forward. As the noble Baroness, Lady Harris, says, of course it is not perfect—nothing that goes through Parliament or through the General Synod is perfect—but it is an extremely good start and we were delighted to support it. I commend both Measures to the House.